Casual Crossdressing

[Milfmog]

Essentially, I am the same as a woman that wear flannel shirts, jeans, and combat boots. There is no difference except that the Tomboy is accepted by society while the JaneGirl (opposite of Tomboy) like myself is not completely accepted.

I am less than convinced by this assertion. Men may not expect unorthodox styles of dressing to be accepted, but every experience we read of here suggests they are wrong; society does not give a hoot. The fear is between the ears.

Think about this: We have all heard parents say "look at Cindy, she is such a cute little Tomboy playing with those GI Joes and Army Trucks". On the other hand you will NEVER hear this: "look at johnny, he is such a cute little JaneGirl playing with those Barbie Dolls and makeup kit." In the real world, the parents or relatives would slap the crap out of Johnny and tell him to stop acting like a girl!!

If that was your experience then I pity you, however I've never come across parents that stupid. Sure many will try to encourage their son to do "boy things" but I have certainly seen parents who find it cute when their boy plays with a Barbie doll or dresses up as a princess.

Boys are taught at an early age that emulation of any female traits is abhorrent behavior and is forbidden!

Abhorrent??? Really??? I think your fears are causing you to seriously overstate things.

When boys get to school age, the other boys will beat this behavior out of them because they are self policing.

Do you work for the Daily Mail by any chance? I think you are overstating the case again. Kids like to feel that they "belong" and will generally try to be part of the herd; it is rare that this is beaten into them as far more subtle pressures usually do the job long before violence is invoked.

Everyone should have freedom of expression including men.

At last you finally wrote something I can agree with.


Ian.

[Sarongman]

I haven't the patience to find that picture of a small boy in a polka dot dress from some years ago. He wated to have it and was encouraged by his parents.That would add much to Milfmog's argument. Even looking for paperclip symbols started a headache- there are just so many posts!!!

[pleated]

I haven't the patience to find that picture of a small boy in a polka dot dress from some years ago. He wated to have it and was encouraged by his parents.That would add much to Milfmog's argument. Even looking for paperclip symbols started a headache- there are just so many posts!!!

Had a look around skirtcafe - did not find the link to that picture, but I quickly came across this other story from last year where a father supported his dress-wearing son by wearing a skirt himself.
http://www.skirtcafe.org/forums/viewtop ... 58&t=14106

[crfriend]

I haven't the patience to find that picture of a small boy in a polka dot dress from some years ago. He wated to have it and was encouraged by his parents.That would add much to Milfmog's argument.

It's worth recalling that even in the USA putting young children of both sexes in dresses was perfectly commonplace until into the early 20th Century. Pictures exist of Theodore Roosevelt -- a "man's man" if there ever was one -- in a frilly dress as a youngster. In a way it's rather surprising that the practise doesn't still persist as such garments allow the parents easy access to the "end of the tube" away from the loud noise to take care of the results of the complete lack of responsibility.

The pressure to "conform" doesn't really start ramping up until it's time to enter school, and then it becomes very powerful, to the point where it's futile to resist. This is the same tactic used in various militaries during "basic training" where they break the individual will of people and re-make them in a different, manufactured, image and, make no bones about it, the process is completely and utterly dehumanising. The use of overt violence depends mainly upon the surrounding culture; in a pacifist culture it won't be much of a problem, but in an already violent culture (the USA, for instance) it's only a short distance away and that includes the schoolyard where fights are pretty much expected and nobody bats an eyelash about it.

[rick401r]

It''s worth recalling that even in the USA putting young children of both sexes in dresses was perfectly commonplace until into the early 20th Century.

I wish I had the photo from my Mother's album of me playing in the yard in a dress. She said that's all she dressed me in. It is out of my range of memory, must have been about 1952.

[Kirbstone]

During Archaeological Society visits to Historic houses and from information given us by the aristocratic incumbents, from several such sources it is clear that in more? troubled times to avoid kidnap of male heirs they were routinely dressed as girls until they were in double figures in age.

This custom percolated down to ordinary folk who did likewise, but perhaps not for so long in their boys' lives. I posess a picture of my own father whose parents were ordinary schoolteachers, dated 1904 when he was 3 yrs old and dressed like a girl, down to the long hair. I do believe that at age 4 or 5 they chopped the hair and swopped for boys' clothes. He had two younger sisters anyway who probably got good wear out of them.

T.

[justfred]

I am not a crossdresser because I am not attempting to appear as a woman. Crossdressers attempt to deceive folks into believing that they are a woman.

I disagree with this, though I think it's just a matter of terminology.

To me, a "crossdresser" just wears women's clothes without attempting to "pass" as a woman. A "drag queen" wears women's clothes for comedy effect, and may appear to varying degrees as a woman, or not. "Genderf**k" is where you wear the other gender's clothes while presenting as the other gender - in a dress, with a beard, for example, or the usual "tomboy". A "transvestite" is using women's clothes to look like a women, but "identifies" as a male. A "transsexual" identifies as a female.

But of course others define it differently. I also think you don't need to define yourself, just wear and do what you'd like (within the bounds of law and decency).

[Grok]

From the other way. One piece of advice that may be relevant to this forum-find your own community.

[Sarongman]

Two media examples of "Tomboys" that I can readily bring to mind are, Thom Westcott, who is a correspondent for Land Rover Monthly magazine, and drives a military lightweight as old as, if not older than, herself and, over the pond in the U.S.A., Kari Byron from Mythbusters, the most evocative picture being her, lookjng supremely blissful, firing a minigun to cut down a tree faster than chainsawing.

I can't forget my own SO in all this, who was removed from a posh girls boarding school for boyish behaviour and, in the other school, would be called to the senior classes to euthanase frogs and mice and make the first incision in science classes. 'Course she had practice skinning rabbits she had shot!

[skirtingtheissue]

Welcome to the forum, CC, where as your can see there is a lot of expressed interest in the male/female blending aspect of freestyle fashions. There are many other threads that deal with this topic, as you have probably seen.

Allow me to add my 2 cents worth...

To me, "crossdressing" implies emulating a woman whether it be in private or out in public, where one's goal is to "pass" as a woman or come close to it. It includes a total look, from head to toe. Some men do that full time, others only occasionally. The various crossdressing sites embrace the term crossdresser and crossdressing and the abbreviation CD is often seen. The term "transvestite" is seen as outdated and negative. It once implied an erotic element to the behavior.

But one technical definition of "crossdressing" is merely wearing at least one article of clothing usually associated with the opposite sex, which impinges on men-wearing-skirts and some other fashion freedom concepts that you advocate. Most skirters, who simply want to wear an unbifurcated garment, want to stay clear of that word and that definition. So, much as I totally agree with your philosophy, I'm not going to introduce myself as a "casual crossdresser" in conversation or think of myself using that term.

I am primarily a member here because I love the skirting movement and advocate the pure concept that men should be ""allowed"" to wear skirts. But I am also happy that there is this "freestyle fashion" subset who are interested in expressing a certain amount of "femininity" by selecting certain skirts, other garments, jewelry, or accessories that rightly or wrongly are associated with women. I am totally aligned with your thoughts on this, and, like you, never want to be or appear to be a woman, and do not identify with crossdressers. I'll look forward to your future posts!

[jamie001]

Essentially, I am the same as a woman that wear flannel shirts, jeans, and combat boots. There is no difference except that the Tomboy is accepted by society while the JaneGirl (opposite of Tomboy) like myself is not completely accepted.

I am less than convinced by this assertion. Men may not expect unorthodox styles of dressing to be accepted, but every experience we read of here suggests they are wrong; society does not give a hoot. The fear is between the ears.

I'm not sure about this. The only place that I am not out is with my FreeStyling is at work. Even though many of the engineers come to work in shorts and flip-flops, I doubt that management would tolerate my look simply because of homophobia which is still rampant in companies run by men even though my choice of attire has nothing to do with my sexual orientation. For example, I heard the following statement at a company I worked for several years ago: "I don't have a problem with homosexuals as long as they try to look like men and don't dress like a gay". Sad, but true.

Boys are taught at an early age that emulation of any female traits is abhorrent behavior and is forbidden!

Abhorrent??? Really??? I think your fears are causing you to seriously overstate things.

Mothers are typically tolerant of feminine behavior in a boy child. Do some googling on this subject and you will find that the majority of men are intolerant of feminine traits in their boy children. Some have even gone to extreme measures to correct the behavior. There was a specific case in the news about 2 years ago about a 5 year old boy wearing pink nail polish. It was on dozens of blogs. The majority of women had no problem with it, 90 percent of the men that responded said that it was unacceptable behavior that needed to be remedied. On the other hand, the same men were fine with girl children engaging in typically masculine activities.

When boys get to school age, the other boys will beat this behavior out of them because they are self policing.

Do you work for the Daily Mail by any chance? I think you are overstating the case again. Kids like to feel that they "belong" and will generally try to be part of the herd; it is rare that this is beaten into them as far more subtle pressures usually do the job long before violence is invoked.

I was one of those children the was bullied and beaten during middle school because I was more feminine than the other boys.

Everyone should have freedom of expression including men.

At last you finally wrote something I can agree with.


Ian.

[crfriend]

The only place that I am not out is with my FreeStyling is at work. Even though many of the engineers come to work in shorts and flip-flops, I doubt that management would tolerate my look simply because of homophobia which is still rampant in companies run by men even though my choice of attire has nothing to do with my sexual orientation.

This may speak more to the quality of the environment you work in than anything else. As far as flip-flops go, those become inappropriate attire for virtually everything once one gets more than 50 yards from the beach. We have the same problem where I work, but at least I wear my skirts to work.

I was one of those children the was bullied and beaten during middle school because I was more feminine than the other boys.

As above, this likely speaks more to where you grew up than any sort of normative behaviour on a global level; it likely points to your growing up in a traditionally violent society, and possibly even a more-violent subset than the norm. Deep south USA, perhaps?

I got a certain amount of bullying when I was a lad, and fights were pretty much expected between boys; I didn't think that was a good thing and tried very hard to stay out of fights. Unfortunately, they sometimes found me and the only way out was to finish them -- quickly and brutally. Soon enough I got a reputation not to be messed with and that was pretty much that save for habitual bullies (most of which either found lodgings in jails later in life or joined law-enforcement).

[couyalair]

Unfortunately, cross-dressers so often seems to go to great lengths to exagerate whatever is thought of as feminine -- gaudy makeup, flamboyant wigs, high heels, not to mention anatomic enhancement; the drag queen type.
Personally, I find none of this attractive in any way when it's flamboyant and overdone, whether the person be male or female. However, there is a local character, vocally male, who wears solely women's clothes. He is tall and slim, invariably elegant, perfect hairdo, but with nothing exagerated or unnatural. I imagine that young women would consider his appearance old-fashioned, but for me, he is far more stylish and presentable than many modern youngsters. I respect his choice for doing what he wants to, without mannerisms or flamboyancy, just being himself in the persona he has chosen, unlike the younger generation that all seem to want to look alike. I have no idea of his sexuality -- it's none of my business. I just think it's good to see someone boldly refusing to toe the line. As it happens, I've never mentioned his attire, and he has never mentioned mine.

Martin

[Sarongman]

I would also like to postulate that overt "Tomboyism" is a modern phenomenon only coming into prominence in, probably in the last fifty years, though starting with the female workforce in "men's work' during the 1939-1945 war. Women, who had been dressing in "male" attire, were in the era directly after the conflict, supposed to go back to being humble helpmeets of their menfolk and women dressing in trousers and male like shirts were quizzed as to their own sexual orientation. What is happening now with crossdressers is just a repeat of what female pioneers experienced a half century ago--and they have, in some little way, smoothed the road to acceptance for others to follow. Those who have just taken an unbifurcated line will have an easier time than the more flamboyant "crossdresser".

[Grok]

It would be best to substitute another term for "casual cross dresser," to avoid association with the CD/TV group.